Dr. Brady, President of the University, Lord Mayor of Dublin, Dr. Thomas, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, Thank you, or should I say go raibh maith agaibh. It is a true privilege and a high honour to receive the Honorary Degree of Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, from University College, which is Ireland’s largest university and alma mater of James Joyce and five Irish Taoisigh (Prime Ministers), among countless other distinguished alumni. I am especially pleased to receive an honorary doctorate in Law. Most of my professional life I have worked to create and develop institutions, relations, based essentially on laws. It is my deep conviction that the rule of law is the only possible cornerstone of social life and international relations. Once again thank you to University College Dublin for this great honour.It is always a pleasure to return to Ireland. Robert Schuman once wrote that an Irish saint, Columbanus, was “the patron saint of those who seek to construct a united Europe”. Ireland has always been at the heart of Europe. I am most grateful for inviting me to speak to you today, and I want to congratulate the Dublin European Institute for their fine research on the European Union.***Lord Mayor, Mr. President, distinguished friends, I have come to talk about Europe. About why we embarked on the journey of European integration. About what binds us together and what we have achieved. And why we need to continue this journey together. From building peace in Europe to promoting peace around the world. After the tragedy of World War II, European countries wanted to find new ways of working together to end the cycle of war and division. They removed barriers to trade, developed common policies and steadily enlarged their numbers from 6 to 12 and then, 15. The end of the Cold War opened the way to the reunification of the whole continent and the Union grew to 25 and now 27 member-states. Fifty years on since the start of the integration process, the results are impressive.Europe is enjoying the longest era of peace and prosperity in its history. The Union includes 27 sovereign democracies, collectively numbering 500 million citizens. Not very long ago citizens of some of these countries lived under dictatorships and totalitarian regimes. The EU played a central role in their successful transition to democracy.The 27 EU governments have created the world’s largest economy. They have also established the world’s largest area of free movement across national borders. Most EU countries are members of the Eurozone. This a particular relevant point in the current, painful severe recession. The common currency, the euro, is providing significant stability. All this is based upon strong institutions and a continent-wide legal order. There is nothing like it anywhere else in the world. Ordinary citizens have benefited most in the European Union. Without restrictions they can travel across 27 countries to find a job, get an education, invest in a business. Without any doubt, the EU is a unique experiment in world history.But why, some ask, does the EU need a foreign policy? Why does it not concentrate on its internal market? My answer is simple: Europe is not, and cannot be, an island of peace and prosperity in a turbulent world. We share common values and interests. We want to promote those values and protect those interests. But in today’s world they face challenges and threats – whether the abuse of human rights, flows of migrants escaping conflict and failed states, disputes over natural resources, or international terrorism. Most of these challenges are generated beyond our borders. An EU foreign policy is needed because no country in Europe can cope with them on its own. By acting together we can achieve much better results.Successive Irish governments have understood this. Thirty four years ago, the first Irish presidency of the EU in 1975 negotiated the Lomé Convention, a landmark trade and aid agreement with 71 African, Caribbean and Pacific countries. The EU has since become a major actor in a world that has radically changed and become more interdependent. Unless all of the world’s major actors work together we cannot tackle the global economic crisis, the environmental emergency, or international security challenges. The EU is at the heart of this collective effort.Global interdependence means others increasingly ask for our help. The EU has responded to these calls. The EU is leading international efforts to fight poverty in Africa and keep the peace in the Balkans. The EU is monitoring a ceasefire in Georgia and training the Afghan, Iraqi and Palestinian police forces as they try to re-build their societies.What ties all these things together? In other words, what is EU foreign policy ultimately for? The answer is equally simple: the aim of EU foreign policy is to replace the law of force with the force of law. This comes naturally to us. The EU, after all, has always been a peace project founded on democratic values and respect for laws. The EU wants a world order based on the rule of law. I do not need to tell an Irish audience about the importance of international law. W.B. Yeats warned us of the consequences of a world without laws in The Second Coming:Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;Mere anarchy is loosed upon the worldIreland was a forceful advocate of the League of Nations in the 1920s and 1930s. And it has been a strong supporter of the United Nations since it joined in 1955.The core goal of the European Security Strategy, which EU governments adopted in 2003 and recommitted themselves to last December, is “effective multilateralism”. The EU does not just want international laws to be written. It wants those laws to be respected and implemented. Of course, we are not always successful in each and every case. And we need to ensure that we practice what we preach. But surely Europe is right to try strengthen the rule of international law and to advocate more effective global governance.All this explains our support for strong institutions – from the WTO to the African Union to the OSCE – and rules for specific issues: from human rights, to non-proliferation, to climate change. It also explains why EU governments co-ordinate their policies at the United Nations, and strongly support UN efforts to stop conflicts and manage crises. EU countries pay 40 per cent of the UN peacekeeping budget. At the UN’s request the Union has sent peacekeepers to Bosnia, Chad and Congo. In short, we work hand in glove with the UN.Foreign policy is not just about what you say. It is as much about what you do, and how you do it. The EU is unique in this respect. It is not a military alliance, like NATO. NATO is for most EU member states the cornerstone of their territorial defence. This is not the EU’s objective. Rather, EU security and defence policy is a crisis management policy, which forms only one part of a much broader EU foreign and security policy. Plus, the implementation of the EU's security and defence policy uses the full range of resources available to us: from diplomats and development workers to judges and police, and – but only when necessary – soldiers.Let me illustrate this with some figures. Since 2003, the EU has initiated 23 crisis management operations. Only six of those missions have been military operations. The other 17 operations have been civilian, deploying police, judges, border guards, customs officials and other experts. Ireland, for example, has sent eight Gardaí to Kosovo to participate in the EU’s rule of law mission there. There are also four Gardaí in Bosnia, and an Irish policeman formerly headed the mission there.The EU’s holistic approach to international security is more similar to that of the United Nations than any other international organisation. This is all part of the growing international consensus that today’s international security challenges cannot be addressed using only, or even predominantly, military means – a truth which President Obama and his administration have also emphasised. Development policy is another key instrument. Collectively, EU governments and the EuropeanCommission are the largest spenders on development aid in the world, totalling some €46 billion in 2007. That is proof of the continued compassion that Europeans have with those who suffer.But we cannot have development without security. In countries emerging from conflict, it is human security that matters. That includes the rule of law, protecting human rights, effective governance and the chance of finding a job in a growing economy.The EU aims to combine its defence and development policies, so that they are more effective at protecting the vulnerable. EU peacekeepers worked closely with more than 70 development NGOs on the ground in Chad. A primary goal of the current EU naval operation off Somalia is to protect World Food Programme ships from attacks by pirates.***If we want Europe to meet the expectations of being a solid promoter of peace, then we need the Lisbon Treaty. For that treaty would make EU foreign policy more effective. It would streamline our institutions, helping us to bring together our diplomacy with our defence and development policies in a more coherent way. It would also mean that once a foreign policy decision is taken, we should be able to implement it more quickly and more effectively. It would ensure greater continuity, coherence and credibility in our dealings with third countries such as the US, China and Russia. It is vital for all of us that the Union should continue to make a credible contribution to international deliberations on major issues. We have given a lead to the global community on the crucial issue of climate change. With the Lisbon Treaty in place, we will be better equipped to play this kind of constructive global role. One important fact the Lisbon treaty would not change is that the 27 governments are, and will remain, in charge of EU foreign policy.That is why the EU foreign policy decision-making process is based on consensus. So, EU foreign policy can only work if there is a convergence of 27 national interests. This means the decisionmaking process can be slow and difficult. But it also means the opinions of all 27 are taken into account before any decision is made.One side of the coin is that any member State can block a decision. But the other side is that all have the capacity to actively contribute to shaping common policies. Ireland, for example, has consistently and effectively pressed for respect for human rights to be an integral part of EU relations with countries of the Middle East, Sudan and Burma/Myanmar amongst many others.***EU foreign policy does not just need the agreement of the 27 governments. It also needs their resources. But governments contribute on a voluntary basis. The EU cannot force governments to spend more on development aid or send more soldiers to peacekeeping operations. It is up to each government to decide whether and how it might contribute to any given operation. The Lisbon treaty would not change this fact.For instance, we need more civil resources for our peace-support operations. But finding the right personnel for civil operations is difficult. Not least because police, judges, doctors and administrators are also needed at home. And they do not stay in barracks to be called to duty. Ireland has been strongly supportive of the civilian aspects of ESDP, and has looked to overcome these shortages by pragmatic and flexible means, for instance by seeking experienced personnel from outside the ranks of serving officials. As a case in point, the Irish members of the Georgia and Afghanistan missions are all volunteers who had originally expressed an interest in taking part in the humanitarian and developmental activities of Irish Aid’s Rapid Reaction Corps. I also applaud the Irish Government’s decision to develop a national strategy to develop its capacity to do more in the civilian area.On its own, the EU does not have any military resources. The Union does not have an army nor are there any plans for it to have one. [Sure, Sure!!] The EU cannot conscript the citizens of any Member State. Nor can the EU tell Member States how much money they should spend on defence. Each government retains full control over its armed forces. It must decide for itself if it wishes to contribute to any given peace support operation, in accordance with its own national laws and procedures -in your case, the so-called “triple lock”.But we do all agree that by acting together, on a voluntary basis, we can achieve more than each on our own. The Irish army consistently has one of the highest Member State figures for the number of troops on international duty as a percentage of armed forces. An Irish General – Pat Nash – commanded the EU’s successful peacekeeping operation in Chad, which protected over 400,000 displaced persons and refugees fleeing from the Darfur conflict, before handing over to a UN force in March. I personally saw the Irish contingent in operation and can testify to their remarkable effectiveness. You can be proud of it.But, even when they do manage to deploy their soldiers, European countries often find they lack the right equipment. The peacekeeping mission in Chad was hampered by a severe shortage of helicopters. EU governments created the European Defence Agency to help co-ordinate their equipment plans, so that national governments, acting independently, can find ways to reduce the costs of acquiring equipment. This is sensible. Demand for EU peacekeepers is growing. But equipment costs arerising and European defence budgets are falling.***In conclusion, in today’s changing world Europeans can only make their voices heard if they speak together. And EU foreign policy can only work if we act together. If I can make a sporting analogy with the Ryder Cup: After World War II the British and Irish golf team usually lost badly to the Americans. This continued until the Irish-British team invited other Europeans to play with them in 1979. The Europe team – including a number of fine Irish golfers, as well of course as some brilliant Spaniards - has since held its own with the Americans.It is a similar story with EU foreign policy. It was born out of a mix of idealism and pragmatism. It marries the collective resources of EU governments with their common values and interests. And even though it has a long way to go, it is beginning to work on the ground. The world around us is changing fast. New problems and crises are emerging. Power is shifting. This all calls for a more united European response. The Lisbon treaty would help us develop a more effective EU foreign policy. I am convinced that a more effective EU foreign policy would benefit Ireland, Europe and the whole world.Friends, we should remind ourselves of the wisdom of an old saying from the Irish language: í neart go cur le chéile. In unity there is strength. Together we are stronger.Thank you.
News and views of Constance Cumbey concerning "Radical Middle", New Age Movement, Communitarianism, "planetary humanism," "global governance," European Union, Javier Solana, Jeremy Rifkin, "New Age Politics," law in the USA, combined with life in general -- sometimes humorous, sometimes not!
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Solana speaks earnestly to the Irish!
Does this April 22nd Irish University Honorary Doctorate Presage Irish Acceptance of the Lisbon Treaty?
Monday, May 25, 2009
Javier Solana's mother? Did she die in 2005?
Pictures are of Luis Solana, Nieves Mathews, Javier Solana and Salvador de Madariaga.
So many mysteries about his man and so few cards he has shown. I only want the truth. I am having a great deal of difficulty in understanding why Salvador de Madariaga would have doted so much on a great nephew (second degree) and we have heard NOTHING of his true grandchildren. Something is wrong with this picture.
As much global governance clout as Javier Solana holds, we DESERVE to know his background, his grooming, and his antecedents.
EU ministers meeting Solana absent death of his motherThe high representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy of the EU, Javier Solana, did not attend today's informal meeting of foreign ministers in Luxembourg of the Twenty-five by the death of his mother, Obdulia Madariaga, EFE reported his spokesman Cristina Gallach.Obdulia Madariaga, who had five children, four males and one female, died on Thursday, the victim of a long illness.Solana met the news last night and had to travel urgently to Madrid to attend the funeral which takes place this afternoon in the cemetery of La Almudena.The spokesman considered unlikely that the high representative to participate tomorrow, Saturday, in the second and final day of the informal meeting.At this meeting, the ministers reviewed the European Community's external policy, with special attention to relations with China, the Caucasus republics, the Middle East and the Mediterranean.
A PLANNED DESTRUCTION OF CHRISTIANITY?
"Calling for a new metaphysic of science/technology, the proponents of the Human Potential Movement perceive the religious heritage of the West, based on Christian premises, as the greatest impediment of an evolving 'cosmic conscience'. In gaining a more comprehensive understanding of the spiritual and material processes of the universe, a mystically inclined elite of technically enhanced human mutants would be able to usher in a homogeneous world socialist society, perhaps not altogether different from the one envisioned in Brave New World." (emphasis added)
Western Christianity has always provided a rational and moral basis for the development of science and technology, including clinical Nanomedicine. Yet this sensible basis has been strongly disputed for about half a century. This paper will outline some of the pivotal reasons why influential intellectuals in England and America, mostly in the later part of the 20th century, concluded that irrationality would be a better foundation for the scientific enterprise.
Aldous Huxley envisioned a future world society totally controlled by an elite group of scientists. His bestknown fictional work explicating this dire prospect bore the title Brave New World. Years later he would “revisit” his prognostications only to conclude that he had underestimated the rate of change realizing his darkest fears. Turning to mysticism, both in its meditative and drug-induced varieties, he prepared the way for the burgeoning Human Potential Movement which was initially formed at the Esalen Institute, Big Sur, CA in the early 1960s. The electrical engineering professor at Stanford University Willis W. Harman, who had gotten involved in researching the cognitive and societal effects of LSD consumption, conducted seminars at Esalen on “Human Potentialities”. Under his directorial supervision at the Stanford Research Institute a scientific study entitled “Changing Images of Man” was carried out from 1972-74 with the purpose of changing the “conceptual premises underlying Western society”, including a radical modification of the rational worldview of western scientists. As the president of the Institute of Noetic Sciences from 1977 to 1996, Harman advocated openly a mystical outlook on life claiming that a spiritual approach to scientific research and technological development would greatly enhance our understanding of the monistic unity of the universe.
Erdmann, M Eur J Nanomed 2009; 2:31-38
In reading it, bear in mind that Paul N. Temple signed Willis Harman's Institute of Noetic Sciences paychecks for many years. Paul Temple is mentioned in the article. Paul Temple's World Business Academy write up proudly boasts of IONS and WBA sharing Willis Harman's DNA ! This is an important link between the hi-jacking of evangelicalism of which I wrote in the past and the New Age world.
And to think that Walter Martin and the rest insisted the New Agers were not consciously networked! You be the judge!
Friday, May 22, 2009
A Missing Link? Nieves Mathews and Mark O. Hatfield?
The Mark O. Hatfield Library serves the College of Liberal Arts, the School of Education, and the Atkinson Graduate School of Management. Originally housed in Smullin Hall, the library moved to its new location in 1986. The new building is a gracious, modern, glass-walled structure that overlooks the Mill Race and Jackson Plaza, one of the main gathering places on campus.
The Hatfield Library offers the Willamette community a diverse, well-chosen collection of over 400,000 volumes, over 5,000 current journal subscriptions, and direct access to the Summit database, a shared academic collection of more than 26,000,000 items. The library also provides electronic access to information resources and documents of all types from around the world. The facility also houses an extensive collection of United States Government documents, a collection of Northwest materials, and a small collection of rare and/or old materials. The Hatfield Archives houses the political papers of Oregon's former United States Senator Mark O. Hatfield, which are currently being processed and are not yet open to the public. Senator Hatfield's memorabilia are available for viewing in a public display area, and his book collection is cataloged and available for in house use.
A highly qualified staff of librarians and support personnel, committed to developing and maintaining strong collections and services, supports the research needs of both students and faculty. A program of course-related instruction ensures that students not only find the information they need to satisfy course requirements, but also learn the search strategies they need to retrieve and critically evaluate information in a society that places increasing importance upon these skills. Librarians are also available at the reference desk and by appointment to help students with their research needs.
The print collection, developed over more than a century, provides strong support for undergraduate and some graduate research. The library's holdings also include a collection of musical scores and sound recordings. A collection of over 6,000 video recordings of classic motion pictures, documentaries, and other films supports courses across the curriculum. An efficient interlibrary borrowing service utilizes a national computer network and a developed electronic document delivery system for locating and rapidly retrieving material not available locally.
The library participates in Summit, a consortium of academic libraries in Oregon and Washington that share an online catalog. Summit Borrowing makes it possible to use the library resources of the member libraries as a single collection. Students, faculty and staff can request materials any time and expect rapid delivery. Participation in Summmit enhances the strong local collection and the traditionally strong interlibrary borrowing services.
The Mark O. Hatfield Library is an important public space on campus and includes many attractive areas suitable for study and reflection. A variety of displays are hosted, and lectures, readings, and recitals are frequently held in the popular Mark O. Hatfield Room. A 24-hour study room equipped with vending machines provides student space during the hours the library is closed.
My assumptions in writing the following were based on my perception that this was Mark Hatfield's personal collection. As a college collection, it probably has far less significance to Mark Hatfield's personal beliefs and connections . That Mark Hatfield had strong ties and sympathy for the New Age Movement is abundantly well documented elsewhere including his own books.
"This is interesting on many levels! It could well be an important missing link between several major links I have been following. The State of Oregon was plagued by Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh (Osho) in the 1980s. Mark Hatfield had been the governor of Oregon and thereafter represented the state in the United States Senate. His tenure was engulfed in financial scandal in 1982 when it was revealed that he had profited mightily on two real estate deals involving Paul N. Temple. Paul Temple, we have abundantly proved, was working both the Christian and the New Age powerhouse sides of the fence -- Fellowship Foundation (Abraham Vereide / Doug Coe) and the Institute of Noetic Sciences. Mark Hatfield and Paul Temple were two of the inner group, "The Core" of the Fellowship Foundation. The book pictured credits author Nieves de Madariaga Mathews' inspiration to Osho / Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh. Sir Francis Bacon was a recognized pillar of the occult. Nieves is either Javier Solana's mother or a cousin (depending on which of Solana's authorized biographies one believes). She is clearly the elder daughter of Salvador de Madariaga, Javier Solana's main lifetime mentor.Nieves Mathews on June 21, 1977, confided in the linked interview with "Osho Love Osho" that she was raised in Sufism by Salvador de Madariaga (her father) and Constance Archibald de Madariaga (her mother). In the same interview, she said she had known Krishnamurti (who had been the original New Age candidate to be 'Maitreya the Christ'.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
THE ALLIANCE OF CIVILIZATIONS - TONIGHT'S PROGRAM
Rich Peterson (Rich of Medford) is continuing his in depth assessment of the Alliance of Civilisations and I am joining him in that endeavor. Rich is convinced that the British government published ban of travelers to its country, including but not limited to American broadcaster Michael Savage, is a part of the AOC thrust. I have my deep suspicions on the recently released report alleging violence and humiliation by Irish Catholic schools run by the Christian Brothers through 1990. I am suspecting that this might be part of the developing rationale to stifle private religious education -- worldwide. The Alliance of Civilizations has commissoned studies on "humiliation" to be used in shaping future laws on curriculum development and religious school management. Rich and I will be discussing this on the air tonight from 8 to 9 p.m. eastern time, 7 to 8 central time, 6 to 7 mountain time and 5 to 6 Pacific time.
Please read Rich's most recent article on the Alliance of Civilisations / Alliance of Civilizations and its probable ties to the British situation.
Tune in and stay tuned!
May 19, 2009
Michael Savage, An Alliance of Civilizations Trial Run?
by Richard Peterson
From its earliest stages, the Alliance of Civilizations initiative found itself an ally named Britain. Tony Blair, reportedly a new ager, gifted the Alliance with Britain’s approval before the initiative had even launched. The spontaneous cartoon crisis yielded further British endorsement when Charles, Prince of Whales, called for the “at-one-ment” of all the world’s faiths through adoption the Alliance of Civilizations and Interfaith Reconciliation. “At-one-ment” is a new age doctrine said to join together individuals attuned to a collective global consciousness whereby religious and political ideologies which cause separation are to be set aside in favor of a common value system. This common set of values is to become the foundation upon which the new civilization is built. The Alliance of Civilizations is one such interfaith initiative responsible for defining that common value system. The difference between the Alliance and other interfaith efforts is that the Alliance has been incorporated into military strategy thus giving it lion’s teeth. The Alliance has set forth to establish a global conscience which UN signatory nations are to adopt in implementation of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The Alliance has focused a great deal of effort attempting to unifying Islam with the West by heaping heavy scorn upon the West while praising Muslim nations for their contributions to modern civilization.
UK Parliamentary records further exhibit Britain’s participation in the Alliance of Civilizations and calls for other nations to follow their example. British Minister for International Development Shahid Malikis is Britain’s representative for the Alliance of Civilizations. According to Malikis, the UK favors tackling radicalization and that “true Islam is a key part of the solution to extremism in the name of Islam”. Malikis statement reminds me of the Alice Bailey doctrine on the partial sealing of the door where evil dwells which says:
- “…Palestine should no longer be called the Holy Land; its sacred places are only the passing relics of three dead and gone religions. The spirit has gone out of the old faiths and the true spiritual light is transferring itself into a new form which will manifest on earth eventually as the new world religion. To this form all that is true and right and good in the old forms will contribute, for the forces of right will withdraw that good, and incorporate it in the new form. Judaism is old, obsolete and separative and has no true message for the spiritually-minded which cannot be better given by the newer faiths; the Moslem faith has served its purpose and all true Moslems await the coming of the Imam Mahdi who will lead them to light and to spiritual victory; the Christian faith also has served its purpose; its Founder seeks to bring a new Gospel and a new message that will enlighten all men everywhere…”
Bailey’s “true Moslems”, I believe, are those practicing Islamic mysticism, the Sufis. Today, Sufism is being portrayed to the westerners as the peaceful moderates of Islam who are valuable allies in the war against extremism which dismisses the Al-Qaeda ties to Sufism. (Additional criticisms of Sufism may be found here, here, and here.)
This would leave one to wonder why some of the British leadership would turn to “the most ferocious soldiers of Islam” and embrace a set of “common values” which are being defined by individuals who are hostile towards the West. One British MP of specific interests is counter-terrorism Home Secretary Jacqui Smith who praised the Sufis for providing a template of values in which we can live.
Smith made recent headlines when she included U.S. talk radio host Michael Savage among terrorists who are not permitted to enter Britain. Here are links to the official exclusion list along with the Smith’s announcement to Parliament.
Michael Savage is known for his conservative views and his opposition to global governance, communist ideology, illegal immigration, homosexual behavior, etc. Savage is a defender of national sovereignty. Overall, Michael Savage does not appear to share the Alliance of Civilizations values system and world view. Savage’s ideology is one which the Alliance considers exclusionary; intolerant; and violently radicalizing.
As I read Smith’s statements why she banned Michael Savage from Britain, I couldn’t help but notice the identities in her language and the corresponding Alliance of Civilizations’ Terms of Reference. According to Alliance, “to guide this initiative, the Secretary-General, in consultation with the co-sponsors, has established a High-level Group of eminent persons with the following objectives:
- To provide an assessment of new and emerging threats to international peace and security in particular the political, social and religious forces that foment extremism;
- To identify collective actions, at both the institutional and civil society levels, to address these trends;
- To recommend a practicable programme of action for States, international organizations and civil society aimed at promoting harmony among societies.”
“Toward this end, the High-level Group will consider practical strategies:
- To strengthen mutual understanding, respect and shared values among different peoples, cultures and civilizations;
- To counter the influence of groups fomenting extremism and the exclusion of others who do not share their worldviews;
- To counter the threat to world peace and stability posed by extremism;
- To foster awareness in all societies that security is indivisible and is a vital need for all, and that global cooperation is an indispensable prerequisite for security, stability and development.
As I read Smith’s rationale for naming Savage amongst terrorists, I began to suspect she had applied Alliance of Civilizations’ guidelines which guided her to the conclusion he is a terrorist. According to Smith:
- "I think it's important that people understand the sorts of values and sorts of standards that we have here the fact that it's a privilege to come and the sort of things that mean you won't be welcome in this country,"
- "Coming to this country is a privilege. If you can't live by the rules that we live by, the standards and values that we live by, we should exclude you from this country and, what's more, now we will make public those people that we have excluded.
- "This is someone who has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred, of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence if that person were allowed into the country”
- "If people have so clearly overstepped the mark in terms of the way not just that they are talking but the sort of attitudes that they are expressing to the extent that we think that this is likely to cause or have the potential to cause violence or inter-community tension in this country, then actually I think the right thing is not to let them into the country in the first place. Not to open the stable door then try to close it later," Ms Smith said.
What about individuals presently living in Britain who violate these shared values? It may be worth taking a second look at Gordon Brown’s advisor who recently called for the UK population be reduced by one half.
Noteworthy is that dissenting voice in Britain named Melanie Phillips has also noticed the Alliance of Civilizations influence over British politics. Phillips writes “much of the problem is that the government’s advisers and civil servants have had their heads filled with the revisionist and ahistorical rubbish about Islam produced by authors such as Karen Armstrong or John Esposito.” Incidentally, Malaysia banned Karen Armstrong and John Esposito’s books citing reasons that they disrupted peace and harmony.
Michael Savage has raised an excellent question: how did his name reach the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith’s desk? For now, I can only speculate. Yet as I look at people and organizations I believe may share an interest in seeing Michael Savage disappear from the air waves, one common connection keeps coming up. That is the Alliance of Civilizations.
United States Department of Homeland Security
Michael Savage has named Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in a lawsuit charging her with violation of Americans’ civil rights by subjecting them to unfavorable treatment based upon their political ideologies. Under the Bush Administration the United States privately supported the Alliance of Civilizations yet sent no high-level representation to AoC forums. President Obama’s has changed the tone by personally attending a dinner where he was expected to speak at the Second Alliance of Civilizations Forum. The Alliance of Civilizations’ doctrines are already noticeable in U.S. counter-terrorism materials.
Council of American-Islamic Relations
The Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is an organization which has pursued interfaith dialogue as a means to resolve the clash among civilizations. Some of CAIR’s speakers favor Sufism and present it as the more peaceful aspect of Islam. Citations from CAIR’s material can be found in Alliance of Civilizations’ reports. The CAIR-Alliance relationship is most noticeable in its associations with Shaykh Hamza Yusuf and Alliance High Level Group members Mohammad Khatami and John Esposito. CAIR is a signatory of a Common Word which interconnects with Religions for Peace and the Alliance of Civilizations initiatives.
CAIR is an organization having a contentious relationship with Michael Savage. Despite CAIR’s claims that it does not support Britain’s ban of Michael Savage, it is behind Hate Hurts America, an interfaith dialogue organization calling upon companies to withdraw advertisements from Savage broadcasts for his criticisms of Islam. The FBI has recently severed ties with CAIR for its involvement with a Hamas a terrorist organization.
Michael Savage posted on his web site an article by the American Thinker which questions whether Bill Moyers “helped to set the stage for the latest UK-based demonization of Savage” by portraying him an extremist who promotes violent radicalization. Bill Moyers is an advocate of interfaith dialogue. Among his advisors is Karen Armstrong, High Level Group member of the Alliance of Civilizations.
In the upcoming days, we will hopefully learn of Jacqui Smith’s decision-making process to include Savage on Britain’s terrorist list. Regardless of how it happened, we are witnessing a fore shadow of what we might expect from the Alliance of Civilizations’ global conscience, global counter-terrorism efforts. Michael Savage is among the first to find himself within the Alliance of Civilizations’ domain which it has claimed for itself. Savage is a major media personality standing at the intersection of politics and religion.
May the Lord help Michael Savage. May the Lord help us all.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Dennis Cuddy on "Secret Nazi Plan" tonight on MY PERSPECTIVE
Dr. Dennis Cuddy has a new article up at NEWSWITHVIEWS.COM concerning "The Power Elite and the Secret Nazi Plan." He will talk about it on the air at 8 p.m. Eastern Time, 5 p.m. Pacific Time. You may call in with questions at 888-747-1968 and/or listen live at www.themicroeffect.com. Here is a link to Dennis' new article.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Rich of Medford saw the Michael Savage et al purge coming
To my readersRichard Peterson posted the article below to his blogspot on May 3, 2009. A few short days later, Great Britain released a list of 16 people "named and shamed" by it and banned from coming to Great Britain. Most prominently on the USA list was Jewish radio commentator Michael Savage, now labeled in effect as a terrorist for criticisms of a religion other than his own. As to others on the list including Pastor Phelps of Topeka, Kansas, I understand that perhaps at least some of the people on that list never intended to go there and enrich it with their tourist dollars. Although I am generally not a fan of "shock jock" type radio, I am deeply concerned about freedom of speech issues -- both as a citizen and as a lawyer viewing where our our Orwellian 1984 society adjourned for 25 years to 2009. Richard and I have been doing some telephone and on-line collaboration and the circumstantial evidence is that the Alliance of Civilizations is lurking in the near foreground on this Great Britain move which may unfortunately presage our near global future. Read this and stay tuned. Today it was Michael Savage. Tomorrow it may be any one of us.
Free Speech in Fetters
by Richard Peterson
The Second Forum of Alliance of Civilizations has passed and the American media coverage has amounted to little more than did or did not Obama attend the Forum? One might have expected better media coverage with questions ranging from what is the Alliance of Civilizations to what is United States’ interest in this initiative. Instead, the media expressed confusion despite Turkey’s Foreign Ministry had published President Obama’s itinerary on its web site. The itinerary shows President Obama was expected to give a speech at the forum.
- "Nothing is so unworthy of a civilized nation as allowing itself to be governed without opposition by an irresponsible clique that has yielded to base instinct. It is certain that today every honest German is ashamed of his government…by means of gradual, treacherous, systematic abuse, the system has put every man into a spiritual prison. Only now, finding himself lying in fetters, has he become aware of his fate."
This September the UN General Assembly will vote whether the Alliance of Civilizations initiative moves from that of preparatory to activation stage. The Alliance openly calls for tight controls on free speech. A Media Rapid Response force has been established to provide newspapers and television stations reporting “guidelines” during times of crisis, particularly in the area of where politics and religion intersect. Given the system of global governance intends to unify religion and the state rather than maintain separation, everything now falls within this intersection. To ensure that media coverage adheres to a code of conduct, the Alliance of Civilizations has called for journalistic accreditation as well as a review board which will monitor news coverage. The Alliance, to show it upholds the principles of a free press, says that the he media will be “self-regulating” although it acknowledges that “regulation is not possible without pressure to bear”.
There are two individuals whom I would like to credit for recently drawing attention to the Alliance’s global gag on free speech. These articles are by Claudia Rosett writing for Forbes and Brett Schaefer writing for Heritage Foundation. These journalists get it. Claudia Rosett has clearly spent time reading the Alliance of Civilizations materials. Quoting from Rosett:
- “…the Alliance in 2005 set up a secretariat in New York, and enlisted a founding panel of 20 "eminent persons" to further shape its agenda. This group, heavy on eminences from Islamic states, included Iran's Khatami--proposer of the original Dialogue. ..And in the four years since it morphed into existence as the latest phase of the Iranian-sponsored Dialogue, the Alliance has become another megaphone for some of the U.N.'s most troubling campaigns. In deference to Islamic anti-blasphemy laws, the Alliance favors a global gag on free speech. ....”
Friday, May 08, 2009
Senator George Mitchell: A New Ager?
"My spiritual Teacher, the Venerable Dhyani Ywahook , Principal Chief of the Green Mountain Band of the Aniyunwiwa (Cherokee) People, Who is, for me, The Spirit of Peace incarnate. With boundless compassion and generosity she has passed to me The precious teachings from her ancient lineage. They permeate my life and every word in this book. I am immeasurably grateful."
"Who are the peacemakers of the world? In my work in international peacebulding in recent years, I have come to the same conclusion as Louise Diamond in her groundbreaking book -- namely, that the peacemakers are each and every one of us. Full of inspiring stories and useful tools, this book is a must-read for everyone who understands that peace in our daily lives, in our families and communities, is a crucial part of building a world where peace is truly a way of life."